If Naturalism Is True

By Leo Gura - October 9, 2026

Argument against naturalism:

https /www.instagram.com/reel/DeBr-9dhqzU

It’s actually much worse than that. If naturalism is true, then naturalists don’t even know that neurons, brains, or atoms exist, since those are all just conclusions of a mind operating without any guarantee of truth.

A naturalist cannot even say that the universe is just mindless atoms in motion. There is no way for a naturalist to know that is true.

Naturalism is epistemically and ontologically circular. Naturalism begins by assuming Reality is natural, then smugly concludes that it is, and denies any evidence to the contrary on the grounds that if it isn’t natural then it can’t be true. Lol

Notice, there is not and there cannot be a definition for what “natural” is. If you give a finite definition of natural, then you’re wrong, since Reality is Infinite. And if you give an infinite definition of natural, then you’ve admitted that natural means nothing, and you’ve unwittingly admitted the supernatural (Infinity).

The supernatural includes and transcends the natural. All natural things are a subset of the supernatural, in the same way that Newtonian mechanics is a subset of General Relativity.

Click Here to see ALL of Leo's juicy insights.